My point about his contract wasn't whether he's worth it....but worth it to them. You say they never paid the tax....but they still have other pieces they could move around and probably manage to save the same amount of money as flipping Boozer for Bargs. After all, Memphis managed to do the same before inexplicably deciding to trade Gay (really, why did they decide to do us a favor?). If Boozer was such a key piece of a winning team, they would find a way to keep him. After all, with the commitment they made, that's clearly what they foresaw.

Anyway, my point is that if they want to make money and get under the tax, then they should want to stay as competitive as possible around Rose in order to keep making money. Deep playoff runs are where the money's at. One would think Boozer is an important piece to this puzzle given what they committed to him. THey clearly don't believe that anymore. So if he's not part of the puzzle for a team with Rose, Noah, Gibson, Deng, and a bunch of solid role players, why would he be for us, when we're further away from being relevant?

You're obviously entitled to your opinions on the other guys...but I do think Clark is underrated. He has had very little opportunity, and is extremely athletic with a decent all around feel for the game. Not really elite at anything, but solid. If nothing else comes up in trades, he'd be one of my top targets.

We need to get straight Bulls play in 3rd largest US market; they are the 2nd most profitable NBA franchise over the last 5 years with $50M in profit averaged annually; they are the 3rd most valuable NBA franchise at an estimated $800M - they are already making money. They are not inquiring about making a move of Boozer to secure a profit - they are already a profitable team. Last season, for example, with a shortened season (9 less home games and just 3 playoff games) they made $34M in profit according to Forbes. Deep playoff runs certainly help with the bottom line and are more profitable than regular season games - no doubt, no question - but again the Bulls are already one of the biggest cash cows in the league - even without a deep playoff run last season.

Boozer is still a valuable piece in Chicago - just as Gay was a valuable piece in Memphis. It comes down to the cost versus the reward. I still think the cost of Boozer versus the reward is much greater than the cost of Bargnani versus the reward.

And, assuming for just one moment that your assumption about Boozer is correct and Bulls don't believe he is an important piece of the puzzle, he was still averaging 29.5mpg in the regular season for the #1 seed Bulls and 33.3 minutes per game in the playoffs. This season he is averaging 30.5mpg for the 5th seeded Bulls (who are missing their franchise player no less). You are certainly not insinuating that a player who plays the 3rd most minutes and is the 2nd leading scorer and rebounder is not valuable to the franchise?

To answer this question:

So if he's not part of the puzzle for a team with Rose, Noah, Gibson, Deng, and a bunch of solid role players, why would he be for us, when we're further away from being relevant?

Two part answer:
1) This is not a basketball decision on the part of Chicago. It is a business/financial decision - which is also why I make Chicago sweat it out and include a 1st rd pick.
2) It is funny how the same logic was used with Rudy Gay prior to and when the trade was consumated and look how that has played out. This is a league where talent wins. Boozer is yet another talent upgrade and is an easy basketball decision.

Reading comprehension, Matt. Of course Boozer is the better player. But he's not the better contract, for what this team needs today and into the next 2-3 years.

Matt52 wrote:

As for chemistry, you don't recall the much publicized players only meeting shouting in the locker room calling Bargnani out? And what has changed since that time?

He's a bench player. He's the at-best 6th option on offense. He's not being expected to carry this team. He's not expected to be here past this summer. And on top of that, he's never been spoken of as having any kind of attitude problems that would make him a lockerroom problem. I hardly see anything there to indicate a need to get him out of town ASAP at any cost.

Matt52 wrote:

Financially it adds $5M per year. Considering the great history of non-signings, overpayment required to actually sign someone, and Colangelo's drunken sailor approach to free agency, the consequences of not having free agency is hardly one that will cause me to lose sleep.

Unlike you, I don't think "getting rid of Bargnani" is reason enough to jump at an extremely-flawed asset, despite whatever perceived anti-Toronto sentiment is out there. I think you've even said yourself that winning is the only thing that solves that problem, and they seem to have a chance to do some of that with this roster (w/ or w/o Bargs).

Matt52 wrote:

Luckily JV is a true C and not a PF. Boozer impacts Amir and Acy. Personally, despite Amir's great production starting of late, I still see him as a third big and that is not meant as an insult to him.

Boozer will eat front-court minutes. Those are coming from all the current bigs, not just Amir. And you're entitled to your opinion, but I don't see anything 'different' about Amir's game over the past couple of years, which indicates to me that, given minutes and a defined role, he can maintain his current production as a starter. He's also an ideal fit for the lineup, considering the ball-in-hand needs of Gay, Demar, and Lowry. You can't ignore the impact of Boozer's presence on those guys, either.

Matt52 wrote:

I do agree with the implied desperation but even someone such as myself who is dying for him to be sent packing has hesitated on any Boozer deal that does not include a 1st rd draft pick.

Definition of Statistics: The science of producing unreliable facts from reliable figures.

I think we need to take away shots from DD and Rudy. Rudy is averaging 23 shots a game. That needs to go down to at least 20 shots. Would make him more effiecent and are offense. Would nice to get some easy buckets at times.

Two part answer:
1) This is not a basketball decision on the part of Chicago. It is a business/financial decision - which is also why I make Chicago sweat it out and include a 1st rd pick.
2) It is funny how the same logic was used with Rudy Gay prior to and when the trade was consumated and look how that has played out. This is a league where talent wins. Boozer is yet another talent upgrade and is an easy basketball decision.

I think the comparison is bad form Matt. You're using Gay as a comparison because it works in your favour, not because it's apt....Just because neither team wants to pay the tax, doesn't make it a great comparison. They aren't from similar markets, don't play similar positions, are at different points in their careers and where Chicago tries to maximize what Boozer brings, they forced Rudy to limit himself in Memphis....
Boozer: 31 year old PF entering decline with injury history. Has disappeared in the playoffs for a team that acquired him specifically to help them take the next step in the post season. They play a bruising, defensive style of basketball that a halfcourt player like Boozer should thrive in.
Gay: 26 year old SF entering his prime with no injury history. Memphis never even gave their team at full health a chance to compete in the playoffs, thus obviously not caring about taking the next step. They play a bruising, defensive style of halfcourt basketball that is the worst way to maximize Rudy Gay's talents....

Part of the argument in the Gay deal was always about fit. And it was an argument you made frequently, that his style would better fit Toronto where he'd get the ball more, they could play a bit faster and there less space being clogged down low by the bigs.
Can you make a similar argument for Boozer? Does he fit the way we're playing, keeping in mind he may be about as bad defensively as Andrea, not quicker at getting up the floor, and has less range? Would acquiring him lead to having to accommodate him, much like the team was doing with Andrea earlier in the year (until they told BC to keep out of the coaches' decisions???)?

I just don't like this deal. Saying "this is a league where talent wins" and being willing to spend anything to get it is how you get the Isiah Thomas Knicks teams from a few years ago....it's more than just aggregating talent, it's about knowing how to mix talents...

*Again, if it's such an easy decision, why hasn't it been made yet? IF it's a straight-up swap and an obvious talent upgrade (and BC has the green light to spend tax), why hasn't he pulled the trigger? I would guess that aside from money, it's not even close to his top option in terms of fit for this team.

The Raptors currently lack front court depth due to trading Davis and they certainly don't have a low post scoring threat like Boozer right now.

All this bullshit about the contract is a bit much.

Isn't all this BS about the low post scoring threat as well?? Miami uses LeBron in the post(and still the mid to high post mostly). OKC doesn't have a low post threat. NY uses Melo (Amar'e is clearly not the same as he used to be), Dirk is a face up threat in Dallas....There are many successful teams that do not have a high quality low post scoring big man (or threat)....including the two finalists from last year.

*Just going to add that I wouldn't be crying myself to sleep if this trade happened or anything...I'm more trying to get across that if BC feels he needs to make this trade, I hope it's his absolute last choice and complete fall back option...because I don't think it's the best fit.

*Also definitely over thinking of Hickson as a low-cost option....as I just saw he gave a shout out to strippers on twitter....sigh

I think the comparison is bad form Matt. You're using Gay as a comparison because it works in your favour, not because it's apt.....They aren't from similar markets, don't play similar positions, are at different points in their careers and where Chicago tries to maximize what Boozer brings, they forced Rudy to limit himself in Memphis....Boozer: 31 year old PF entering decline with injury history. Has disappeared in the playoffs for a team that acquired him specifically to help them take the next step in the post season. They play a bruising, defensive style of basketball that a halfcourt player like Boozer should thrive in.
Gay: 26 year old SF entering his prime with no injury history. Memphis never even gave their team at full health a chance to compete in the playoffs, thus obviously not caring about taking the next step. They play a bruising, defensive style of halfcourt basketball that is the worst way to maximize Rudy Gay's talents....

Part of the argument in the Gay deal was always about fit. And it was an argument you made frequently, that his style would better fit Toronto where he'd get the ball more, they could play a bit faster and there less space being clogged down low by the bigs.
Can you make a similar argument for Boozer? Does he fit the way we're playing, keeping in mind he may be about as bad defensively as Andrea, not quicker at getting up the floor, and has less range? Would acquiring him lead to having to accommodate him, much like the team was doing with Andrea earlier in the year(until they told BC to keep out of the coaches' decisions???)?

I just don't like this deal. Saying "this is a league where talent wins" and being willing to spend anything to get it is how you get the Isiah Thomas Knicks teams from a few years ago....it's more than just aggregating talent, it's about knowing how to mix talents...

*Again, if it's such an easy decision, why hasn't it been made yet? IF it's a straight-up swap and an obvious talent upgrade (and BC has the green light to spend tax), why hasn't he pulled the trigger? I would guess that aside from money, it's not even close to his top option in terms of fit for this team.

First bold:
Bargnani: 27 yaer old PF already entered int o a decline with serious injury history. Has only played in his rookie and 2nd year and has not led his team to anything other than lottery picks in the last 4 years.

Also Boozer is a major part of the Bulls team. Boozer has done more for Chicago with his left nut than Bargnani has done for Toronto in the last 3 seasons. Boozer's addition to Chicago in his first year saw a 41-41 team go to 62-20. Boozer has been a part of two East #1 seed teams and this year, minus a franchise player, the Bulls are a #5 seed team with him the 2nd leading scorer and rebounder playing the 3rd most minutes.

Second bold:
I did not make that argument but thanks for putting words in to my mouth. My argument has always been about adding talent. Rudy Gay is a major talent upgrade on the wing. Likewise, adding Carlos Boozer and subtracting Andrea Bargnani is a major talent upgrade to the post.

To your ideas of playing a bit faster, consider this: 7 games with Gay Raps ahve 91.6 possessions per game; 7 games before Gay Raps had 95.6 possessions per game. Raptors are actually playing slower WITH Gay. Realizing the Raps are actually playing slower (once you get past the highlight reel footage as a result of their defense that usually features wings and not bigs) and watching the games it becomes obvious that the Raps could use a low post scoring threat which Boozer is shooting 68% at the rim on 5.2 attempts per game.

To your ideas of Boozer clogging the lane: How can JV and Amir play together but not clog the key yet JV and Boozer or Amir and Boozer cannot? Jonas shoots 40% from 16-23 feet on 0.9 attempts per game. Amir shoots 36% from 16-23 feet on 1.9 attempts per game. Boozer shoots 37% on 3.6 attempts per game. Also, who says Boozer clogs the key? From my recollection he played some nice pick and roll ball in Utah.

Third bold:
It is now obvious you are making shit up as the facts above clearly don't support your arguments/opinions. Do you work for MLSE and if not how can you make this statement? The infamous separate meetings of Colangelo and Casey with MLSE board was on December 14th with Bargnani being injured on December 10th and just returning February 6th at which point he played 24 minutes and 29 minutes of productive ball only to miss a game and return the last 2 games as the worthless sack of poop he was earlier in the year with 18 and 12 minutes per game.

Isn't all this BS about the low post scoring threat as well?? Miami uses LeBron in the post(and still the mid to high post mostly). OKC doesn't have a low post threat. NY uses Melo (Amar'e is clearly not the same as he used to be), Dirk is a face up threat in Dallas....There are many successful teams that do not have a high quality low post scoring big man (or threat)....including the two finalists from last year.

*Just going to add that I wouldn't be crying myself to sleep if this trade happened or anything...I'm more trying to get across that if BC feels he needs to make this trade, I hope it's his absolute last choice and complete fall back option...because I don't think it's the best fit.

*Also definitely over thinking of Hickson as a low-cost option....as I just saw he gave a shout out to strippers on twitter....sigh

I agree. It is not my first option either. But the reality is as bad of a contract Boozer is, Bargnani is worse - much worse. Boozer, despite getting paid more, actually contributes to winning. Financially/contractually/CBA-ually/basketbally, making the trade of Bargnani for Boozer is a much better option than not making the trade.

I hope a player like Millsap or Ilyasova can be obtained but if not, Boozer is better than Bargnani - on court and on the books.

Isn't all this BS about the low post scoring threat as well?? Miami uses LeBron in the post(and still the mid to high post mostly). OKC doesn't have a low post threat. NY uses Melo (Amar'e is clearly not the same as he used to be), Dirk is a face up threat in Dallas....There are many successful teams that do not have a high quality low post scoring big man (or threat)....including the two finalists from last year.

*Just going to add that I wouldn't be crying myself to sleep if this trade happened or anything...I'm more trying to get across that if BC feels he needs to make this trade, I hope it's his absolute last choice and complete fall back option...because I don't think it's the best fit.

*Also definitely over thinking of Hickson as a low-cost option....as I just saw he gave a shout out to strippers on twitter....sigh

Cause raptors don't have anyone on the same caliber as those guys. Those are superstars. At best Rudy gay is an All-Star.

I agree. It is not my first option either. But the reality is as bad of a contract Boozer is, Bargnani is worse - much worse. Boozer, despite getting paid more, actually contributes to winning. Financially/contractually/CBA-ually/basketbally, making the trade of Bargnani for Boozer is a much better option than not making the trade.

I hope a player like Millsap or Ilyasova can be obtained but if not, Boozer is better than Bargnani - on court and on the books.

So amnesty him then. There are MANY options available in the 'rid yourself of Bargs' vein that don't involve bringing back a ridiculously overpaid PF on the decline.

You keep making this about getting rid of Bargs. My stance is you don't need to get rid of him at all costs. Trading for Boozer (and they are NOT throwing in a 1st rounder) is an at-all-costs move. Millsap? Sure, but a pipedream, most likely. Ilyasova? Maybe, probably. Boozer, no. There's no freaking way you can convince me he's "better on the books" than Bargnani.

Sit him on the bench and move him in the summer for peanuts. Who cares? You don't. You just want him out of a Raptors uniform. So let's get a return that doesn't hamstring the team going forward.

Definition of Statistics: The science of producing unreliable facts from reliable figures.

Okafor has an expiring contract next year. Can play both PF and C. Is a shell of what he used to be but I would take him for his expiring contract for next season, and if a pick is thrown in as well then even better.

Reading comprehension, Matt. Of course Boozer is the better player. But he's not the better contract, for what this team needs today and into the next 2-3 years.

He's a bench player. He's the at-best 6th option on offense. He's not being expected to carry this team. He's not expected to be here past this summer. And on top of that, he's never been spoken of as having any kind of attitude problems that would make him a lockerroom problem. I hardly see anything there to indicate a need to get him out of town ASAP at any cost.

Unlike you, I don't think "getting rid of Bargnani" is reason enough to jump at an extremely-flawed asset, despite whatever perceived anti-Toronto sentiment is out there. I think you've even said yourself that winning is the only thing that solves that problem, and they seem to have a chance to do some of that with this roster (w/ or w/o Bargs).

Boozer will eat front-court minutes. Those are coming from all the current bigs, not just Amir. And you're entitled to your opinion, but I don't see anything 'different' about Amir's game over the past couple of years, which indicates to me that, given minutes and a defined role, he can maintain his current production as a starter. He's also an ideal fit for the lineup, considering the ball-in-hand needs of Gay, Demar, and Lowry. You can't ignore the impact of Boozer's presence on those guys, either.

Boozer is currently the 2nd leading scorer and rebounder while playing the 3rd most minutes on the 5th seed in the east who happens to be missing their franchise player. Last season Boozer was the essentially tied for 2nd in scoring (15.3/Deng vs. 15.0/Boozer) and the 2nd leading rebounder while playing the 4th most minutes for the #1 seed in the East. Of course Boozer will eat front court minutes because he is a good but overpaid player. The Raptors currently lack front court depth due to trading Davis and they certainly don't have a low post scoring threat like Boozer right now. The addition of Boozer will not affect JV or Amir minutes rather it will cut back the number of minutes we see guys like Fields and Anderson playing at the 4.

All this bullshit about the contract is a bit much. Who are the Raps going to add in the off season? With or without Boozer the Raptors are already sitting above the luxury tax for next season (minus amnesty). Moving from amnesty Kleiza/keep Bargnani to amnesty Kleiza or not/trade for Boozer and they have gone from offering a 3yr/$9M contract in free agency to offering a 4 year/$20M contract.

No team is completing a sign and trade with a player Raptors fans desire (Smith, Millsap) that includes Bargnani. So the argument of the crippling Boozer contract is this:

Bargnani/full MLE (4yr/$20)

vs.

Boozer/mini-MLE (3yr/$9M)

Who are the Raptors going to sign in free agency at the difference of $2M per season and one extra year that will result in a swing of 4.6WS with a slight increase per48mins in scoring (+1.3), rebounding (+8.5 = +6.0 defensive, +2.5 offensive), assists (+1.0), and TS% (+1.2) PLUS the added production of the player on the mini-MLE.

It is obvious Boozer is a better player (as you have agreed) and it is also seems obvious in my opinion that from a financial/contractual/production perspective trading Bargnani for Boozer is more advantageous for the Raptors than not.

If the Raptors can sweat out the Bulls for a first round pick, that is just gravy and now a no-brainer.

His stats have been pretty consistent, his health, focus and leadership have not. Is he an upgrade over Bargnani? Sure, but so is my left nut right now the way Bargs is playing.

I do not think that getting Boozer makes us a significantly better team. Boozer is not that 'missing piece' type player in my mind. Getting him would turn us from a playoff team into a slightly better playoff team...he does not make us a contender.

Now, if you just want a slightly better team to cheer for, that's fine, but I wouldn't expect the team's fortunes to improve that much with his acquisition. If Boozer was that missing piece type of player, a team that added him for that reason wouldn't be so eager to trade him simply to dump money (which is basically what they're doing if they trade for Bargs).

Why invest in such a player when we're almost certainly a playoff team without him? I think if Bargs can't bring back flexibility and/or a piece for the future, they should trade him for depth, not a washed up all-star.

Being title contenders isn't something that's so easily achieved. Usually in a season only around four-five teams are even considered contenders. This season, it's the Heat, Thunder, Spurs, Clippers and maybe Indiana. You need talent, leadership, defense, and a respectable coach. This isn't something can be built over night or over several nights.